Jordan has made some very good points, including the fact that there should have been a disclaimer stating what would happen to the excess funds.

I also am not a lawyer, but work with them in my field and know how important legal wording is especially when dealing with money. From this point on, and for future sets I would suggest adding something like the following disclaimer:

Quote:

We need $X to pay for the next V-set. The quoted printing cost is $Y and the expected shipping is $Z. This money needs to be raised by xx/xx/xx or all donations received will be returned and no cards will be printed. If we exceed our goal the additional money will be used to purchase additional sets, cover unexpected expenses, or be held in reserve for the next sets printing cost. In the event it is decided that no future sets will be made the balance of the account will be divided evenly and returned to members that donated in the last fundraiser. At the completion of this set a finantial disclose statement will be issued in a new thread on these boards.

Now that is just off the top of my head, but something smiler that covers the design team better legally, is a good idea.

I suggest for a third time that we hold a separate fund-raiser for that purpose.

Seems pointless. Your concern is fair. However, the full scope of the issue is now as clear as it needs to be and your suggested solution solves nothing.

If your suggestion is followed then there's potentially an excess for RaR that would then need to be used for some OTHER purpose that was not included in the original statement. And you are right back into the same problem of now using the money for a purpose that was not disclosed when the donation was originally collected.

And I think most donors understand that if they donate to a cause in both a general sense, and in this specific case that some portion of the funds will be used for other reasonable expenses. If anyone truly feels this is not a reasonable expense on philosophical grounds, just contact the appropriate point person privately ASAP and request your donation be refunded. I think that will be zero people, so no point to try to fix a theoretical problem with no real world effect and no point in solving a real world problem with a pointless complexity when you can just deal with it on an individual basis if necessary.

I would like to request that monies previously donated by me, or donated by me in the future, not be specifically earmarked for a particular project or goal but, instead, be used by the V-set committee in any manner that they feel is best, even if that includes the purchase of alcoholic beverages or other refreshments (provided said refreshments do not consist of spam or any spam-related foods).

Covering your collective rear-ends legally is not a bad idea and I would suggest that any and all donation drives be done away with. I would, however, recommend that there be an ongoing "donate to this awesome player run game/general donations" drive that has no set goals. When new sets are going to be released, offer the same thing that was offered this time (donating XX guarantees you a set) and make a "general donations" push.

For anyone annoyed by the back and forth over this issue in this thread look at it this way; it only takes one jack-hole to start making accusations and stirring up feces to ruin it for everyone if the committee isn't keeping themselves protected from a legal standpoint. At this point, Jordan ain't that guy.

I suppose it's a good thing we don't have any of those types in the SWM community, huh?

Bill, I want you to know that I appreciate everything that you and the rest of the guys are doing for the rest of us. Truly. I think you nailed it with your last post though. Hindsight being what it is you should have been more broad in your opening post. Get to work on that whole "reading minds" and "seeing into the future" thing, cupcake.

P.S. Have you guys considered electing 2 people as co-treasurers? You know... for that whole full disclosure and accounting thing (or, as I like to call it, covering your assets). I've been out of the loop for a bit so that may have already happened.

@Chuck, there are 4 people that have access to the money/overseeing it (Myself, Bill, Ray, Eric L) so we can keep all of us accountable.

ps thanks, I'll be enjoying a beer-filled and spam-free meal at GenCon now

_________________Winner of the Knights of the SWMGamers Stats Contest<Joruus (GFC)> - Sheesh, I swear you're like Fool 2.0 (and you can quote me on it xD)Archives of the Gamers JediJoin the FOLLY! Online casual League, find out more here: FOLLY

I would like to request that monies previously donated by me, or donated by me in the future, not be specifically earmarked for a particular project or goal but, instead, be used by the V-set committee in any manner that they feel is best, even if that includes the purchase of alcoholic beverages or other refreshments (provided said refreshments do not consist of spam or any spam-related foods).

Covering your collective rear-ends legally is not a bad idea and I would suggest that any and all donation drives be done away with. I would, however, recommend that there be an ongoing "donate to this awesome player run game/general donations" drive that has no set goals. When new sets are going to be released, offer the same thing that was offered this time (donating XX guarantees you a set) and make a "general donations" push.

For anyone annoyed by the back and forth over this issue in this thread look at it this way; it only takes one jack-hole to start making accusations and stirring up feces to ruin it for everyone if the committee isn't keeping themselves protected from a legal standpoint. At this point, Jordan ain't that guy.

I suppose it's a good thing we don't have any of those types in the SWM community, huh?

Bill, I want you to know that I appreciate everything that you and the rest of the guys are doing for the rest of us. Truly. I think you nailed it with your last post though. Hindsight being what it is you should have been more broad in your opening post. Get to work on that whole "reading minds" and "seeing into the future" thing, cupcake.

P.S. Have you guys considered electing 2 people as co-treasurers? You know... for that whole full disclosure and accounting thing (or, as I like to call it, covering your assets). I've been out of the loop for a bit so that may have already happened.

I would like to request that monies previously donated by me, or donated by me in the future, not be specifically earmarked for a particular project or goal but, instead, be used by the V-set committee in any manner that they feel is best, even if that includes the purchase of alcoholic beverages or other refreshments (provided said refreshments do not consist of spam or any spam-related foods).

Covering your collective rear-ends legally is not a bad idea and I would suggest that any and all donation drives be done away with. I would, however, recommend that there be an ongoing "donate to this awesome player run game/general donations" drive that has no set goals. When new sets are going to be released, offer the same thing that was offered this time (donating XX guarantees you a set) and make a "general donations" push.

For anyone annoyed by the back and forth over this issue in this thread look at it this way; it only takes one jack-hole to start making accusations and stirring up feces to ruin it for everyone if the committee isn't keeping themselves protected from a legal standpoint. At this point, Jordan ain't that guy.

I suppose it's a good thing we don't have any of those types in the SWM community, huh?

Bill, I want you to know that I appreciate everything that you and the rest of the guys are doing for the rest of us. Truly. I think you nailed it with your last post though. Hindsight being what it is you should have been more broad in your opening post. Get to work on that whole "reading minds" and "seeing into the future" thing, cupcake.

P.S. Have you guys considered electing 2 people as co-treasurers? You know... for that whole full disclosure and accounting thing (or, as I like to call it, covering your assets). I've been out of the loop for a bit so that may have already happened.

I had no intention of posting about this topic again until I read this post:You may not like my point of view or even how I communicated it. I have stated my concerns and the reasons behind my concerns, but at no point did I make anything a personal attack or insult. I would ask for that same level of respect. If you disagree with anything I have posted, then feel free to criticize my viewpoint, point out where I am wrong or why you disagree, but calling me a "jack-hole" that is "making accusations and stirring up feces to ruin it for everyone" is not necessary.

I have never insinuated that there has been any criminal activity. I have pointed out that some of the proposed uses for the excess funding could be either perceived as such or may even fall into that category. I do not know why that fact is being ignored. Until an action is taken, my comments have been no more than warnings that somebody may take issue with the choice that is made for the use of these funds and then there may be something bigger that the committee would have to deal with. I have made suggestions on how this could be avoided. I understand why so many people that have read my posts assume the person that would have issue with the selected use would be me, but that is probably not the case. I guarantee you that I am not the only person that has had similar concerns, but has not posted those concerns. (what percentage of the gaming community never posts?)

Since I am not in any way associated with the committee, this forum was the only way for me to voice my concerns about the manner in which the fund-raising was being both worded and the handled. I am not asking you to agree with me. I am asking that you take what I have tried to say and consider another point of view. I know that you may not see or understand how or why what I have posted has been an effort to help the community, but it was. I believe, I suggested that they consult an attorney before doing anything with the excess funding.

Concerning the "reading minds" and "seeing into the future"... I think that assuming that everyone that donated viewed that their donations,(assuming there was excess) were just for the greater good of the community to be used as the committee sees fit, is expecting us to read minds. I did not know that was what was intended and I know there are others that also thought that we were operating by funding one project at a time. I know that they did not plan on donations reaching the level that they have, but since there was nothing in place, I suggested a vote to find out which project the community thinks the funds should be used towards. You do not have to agree with that suggestion, but I will tell you that if a vote was taken and the majority voted to pay off the "debt" from DotF, I would be fine with that.

I would not even care if there was a new "Mission Statement" issued and the majority of community voted to support it. As long as we as a whole are "covering our assets!"

If you really want what is for the greater good for this community you will quit being so defensive. Please just consider for a moment that my ideas and suggestions might also be for the greater good of the community that we all are trying to support.

I would like to request that monies previously donated by me, or donated by me in the future, not be specifically earmarked for a particular project or goal but, instead, be used by the V-set committee in any manner that they feel is best, even if that includes the purchase of alcoholic beverages or other refreshments (provided said refreshments do not consist of spam or any spam-related foods).

Covering your collective rear-ends legally is not a bad idea and I would suggest that any and all donation drives be done away with. I would, however, recommend that there be an ongoing "donate to this awesome player run game/general donations" drive that has no set goals. When new sets are going to be released, offer the same thing that was offered this time (donating XX guarantees you a set) and make a "general donations" push.

For anyone annoyed by the back and forth over this issue in this thread look at it this way; it only takes one jack-hole to start making accusations and stirring up feces to ruin it for everyone if the committee isn't keeping themselves protected from a legal standpoint. At this point, Jordan ain't that guy.

I suppose it's a good thing we don't have any of those types in the SWM community, huh?

Bill, I want you to know that I appreciate everything that you and the rest of the guys are doing for the rest of us. Truly. I think you nailed it with your last post though. Hindsight being what it is you should have been more broad in your opening post. Get to work on that whole "reading minds" and "seeing into the future" thing, cupcake.

P.S. Have you guys considered electing 2 people as co-treasurers? You know... for that whole full disclosure and accounting thing (or, as I like to call it, covering your assets). I've been out of the loop for a bit so that may have already happened.

I had no intention of posting about this topic again until I read this post:You may not like my point of view or even how I communicated it. I have stated my concerns and the reasons behind my concerns, but at no point did I make anything a personal attack or insult. I would ask for that same level of respect. If you disagree with anything I have posted, then feel free to criticize my viewpoint, point out where I am wrong or why you disagree, but calling me a "jack-hole" that is "making accusations and stirring up feces to ruin it for everyone" is not necessary.

I have never insinuated that there has been any criminal activity. I have pointed out that some of the proposed uses for the excess funding could be either perceived as such or may even fall into that category. I do not know why that fact is being ignored. Until an action is taken, my comments have been no more than warnings that somebody may take issue with the choice that is made for the use of these funds and then there may be something bigger that the committee would have to deal with. I have made suggestions on how this could be avoided. I understand why so many people that have read my posts assume the person that would have issue with the selected use would be me, but that is probably not the case. I guarantee you that I am not the only person that has had similar concerns, but has not posted those concerns. (what percentage of the gaming community never posts?)

Since I am not in any way associated with the committee, this forum was the only way for me to voice my concerns about the manner in which the fund-raising was being both worded and the handled. I am not asking you to agree with me. I am asking that you take what I have tried to say and consider another point of view. I know that you may not see or understand how or why what I have posted has been an effort to help the community, but it was. I believe, I suggested that they consult an attorney before doing anything with the excess funding.

Concerning the "reading minds" and "seeing into the future"... I think that assuming that everyone that donated viewed that their donations,(assuming there was excess) were just for the greater good of the community to be used as the committee sees fit, is expecting us to read minds. I did not know that was what was intended and I know there are others that also thought that we were operating by funding one project at a time. I know that they did not plan on donations reaching the level that they have, but since there was nothing in place, I suggested a vote to find out which project the community thinks the funds should be used towards. You do not have to agree with that suggestion, but I will tell you that if a vote was taken and the majority voted to pay off the "debt" from DotF, I would be fine with that.

I would not even care if there was a new "Mission Statement" issued and the majority of community voted to support it. As long as we as a whole are "covering our assets!"

If you really want what is for the greater good for this community you will quit being so defensive. Please just consider for a moment that my ideas and suggestions might also be for the greater good of the community that we all are trying to support.

Ugh, are you ruttin' kidding me? He specifically said "Jordan ain't that guy". That means that you are NOT the hypothetical jack-hole he was referring to.

And frankly you aren't really in the place to tell people to not be defensive. After having said that you aren't going to post again and then coming back to specifically defend yourself (even though you were never attacked in the first place, so there is probably an apology due on your part), you certainly appear to be the defensive one. Also, your points have been heard and noted. Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean we aren't listening to you. You seem to think that just because we are saying you're wrong that we aren't listening or aren't understanding something. Everyone knows what you said and knows what you meant. Consider for a moment that people just honestly think you are wrong. Than consider for a moment that you might actually in fact be wrong. That doesn't seem to be something you've considered at all, since you just keep repeating the same thing.

Your arguments have been heard, and they are here for everyone to see. You don't need to keep repeating them. We understand what you are saying and why you are saying it. If people disagree with you, it's not because they don't understand something. It's because they think (or in some cases KNOW) that you are just plain wrong (and in more than a few of your statements you are, in fact, wrong).

_________________"An elegant, easy-to-understand concept or mechanic that accomplishes 95% of what you want is much better than a clunky, obtuse mechanic that gets you 100%" - Rob Daviau

Hey Jordan I am not part of the committie or design group. So this is one coummunity member to another, we ALL got what you were saying and what you expressed. You have gone from concerned member to that guy who has to be right so that everyone is annoyed as hell including the people that are just looking and reading. I think you are being way overbord but our opnion has been expressed time to shut up.

@ Ruhk: Im workin on gettin him the beer. The post office wouldnt mail it, so Im walking it up there. he lives at the north end of the state, and I live at the south end. Its a long walk.

Echo wrote:

Ugh, are you ruttin' kidding me? He specifically said "Jordan ain't that guy". That means that you are NOT the hypothetical jack-hole he was referring to.

I love how way too often (considering this is a game about little plastic guys) that people get bent out of shape and immediately go into "HULK SMASH KEYBOARD!!!" mode, without even bothering to read the rest of the post that somehow offended them.

Look back over this thread, Jordan. There are people who have expressed their concerns over some of the same things you have yet have not flooded the thread with verbage. Like Azavander, I'm not part of the design team. I appreciate your concerns and certainly you've voiced issues we have to consider moving forward. Like Azavander and many others I've heard you. Voicing issues concisely (like my friend, Treebeard) is sufficient... continuing these long diatribes undermines anything valuable you may have had to say and makes you look like someone who just wants to argue. And, like Daniel, I think you owe Chuck (Nivuac) an apology. He made it very clear he wasn't referring to you.

_________________Cancer is not the boss of me.

Being organized is for people who are too lazy to look for their stuff.

If you really want what is for the greater good for this community you will quit being so defensive. Please just consider for a moment that my ideas and suggestions might also be for the greater good of the community that we all are trying to support.

The thing that I find hilaaaaaaarious is that I actually agreed with you and specifically made it clear that you weren't the hypothetical jack-hole I was referring to.

I highly recommend looking into getting underwear at least one size larger, dude.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum